The increasing hostility between libertarians and social conservatives is entirely unnecessary and plays into the opposition’s hands, Mike D’Virgilio writes.
We all know people, or read of them, who claim to be economic or fiscal conservatives but social liberals. It is also well known that the so-called fiscal conservatives are a bit embarrassed at having to invite their social-conservative cousins to the dance. In fact, they often say very mean things about each other.
Andrew Ian Dodge is a fiscal conservative who certainly sees a sharp difference between the two:
Many of us are still reflecting on all that we saw and heard at CPAC earlier this month. Those of us who are not CPAC virgins were struck by how different it was this year compared to our previous experience with the conservative movement’s annual shindig.
It was certainly a rally of the active conservatives. However those in bloom were not the stereotypical conservatives, but a newer and hipper breed. The social conservatives were very much on the back foot, and the fiscal conservatives — with varying degrees of libertarian leanings — were in the ascendancy. It’s possible that my views were skewed by spending a great deal of time with the Pajamas Media/PJTV and Competitive Enterprise Institute/Bureaucrash hordes, but I don’t think so. I think that limited government, low tax, and ‘get the hell out of my life’ conservatives were very much in the majority at this event.
Bah! That’s a false choice, a dichotomy without a difference. Certainly many people perceive a profound divide between these two types of conservatism, but the dichotomy they see is nothing more than a description of the differences between two groups that are in the same overall political coalition and do indeed belong there. The key for both these groups is to stop worrying about what is conservative about themselves and concentrate on what is liberal about them. Conservatism under the rubric of classical liberalism has room for both groups and would make their political and social programs much more palatable to the overall public while suggesting a more winsome rhetorical approach.
Consider the key differences between the two warring factions. Libertarians focus primarily on liberty and tend to be uncomfortable with others’ concerns about declines in social order, while many social conservatives appear all too willing to set important liberties aside when circumstances seem to call for urgent action. In addition, many of these conservatives have an antagonistic view of culture that often criticizes more than positively engages it, which makes them appear puritanical and antagonistic to any real liberty.
There are basic principles that make one a creature of the right, and these principles are found in our Declaration of Independence: life, liberty, and the pursuit of happiness. And despite the libertarian impulse to void God from any discussion of government, culture, and society, according to America’s founders—all of them—God is the author of those principles, not the state. We are “endowed by [our] Creator” with our rights and liberties, and a widespread denial of that Creator removes the foundation from those essentials of American life.
The founding values of America support a culture of freedom, as do the tenets of classical liberalism, as both are centered on seeking the maximum combination of both liberty and order for both society and the individual. Liberty without personal responsibility cannot exist, and a massive state that undermines personal responsibility is a fierce enemy of liberty. Surely libertarians and conservatives of every stripe can agree on this.
Thus libertarians need to understand that God and personal responsibility are by no means anathema to true liberty but are actually essential to it. And social conservatives need to understand that a society of true liberty will mean that a lot of what goes on will not be to their liking, and that ranting against whatever they don’t like will not create a more virtuous society.
This may be asking a lot, given that most people in either group don’t seem to do nuance very well, but those who know better should attack this false choice wherever it rears its ugly head.
—Mike D’Virgilio
Why thank you. I have to give a lot of credit to one S.T. Karnick. Getting to know him and his thinking this last year and a half as my partner in The Culture Project, I have come to understand how a healthy and true concept of liberty can and should be embraced by the entire right. Not only that, but it should be more attractive to those who are not partisans and not particularly engaged in politics or culture. And maybe one can hope make the right a little less easily demonized by the left, but I won’t hold my breath.
“Thus libertarians need to understand that God and personal responsibility are by no means anathema to true liberty but are actually essential to it. And social conservatives need to understand that a society of true liberty will mean that a lot of what goes on will not be to their liking, and that ranting against whatever they don’t like will not create a more virtuous society.”
That was one of the best paragraphs I’ve seen written on any blog in a long time. Well done.